Verbatim report of proceedings

Thursday, 27 October 2005 - Strasbourg

6. Draft general budget of the European Union - Financial year 2006

- Before the vote:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), rapporteur. – (IT) Mr President, before I propose a few technical adjustments, please allow me to thank all my fellow Members for the excellent debate – concise and to the point – that we had yesterday and for the loyal cooperation that they have given so far and, I hope, will continue to give during the vote and in the subsequent stages.

As happens every year, before we proceed to the vote I ask that a few technical adjustments be accepted. With regard to line 15 06 06 on special annual events, in the second indent of the text the words ‘at the new Museum of Europe’ should be deleted. In line 19 03 06 on European Union special representatives, the word ‘envoy’ in the remark should be replaced with the word ‘representative’ for the sake of consistency with the title of the line. The remainder of the remark on this line has been struck through because of a technical error; that part of the text therefore is not supposed to be deleted.

In Amendment 771 in block 4, the total amount of payment appropriations for budget line 22 02 01 01 should be written in the line and, finally, in the lines on the European Development Fund, a reminder should be introduced to restore the preliminary draft budget. This specifically affects lines 21 03 01 to 21 03 015.

(Parliament approved the technical amendments proposed by the rapporteur)

- Before the vote on Amendments 779 and 231:

  Catherine Guy-Quint (PSE). – (FR) Mr President, what I am about to do is not standard practice. In the following heading, we have two amendments: one amendment tabled by the Committee on Budgets and another concerning orphan medicinal products, which was tabled by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. We have to vote in favour of the amendment tabled by the Committee on Budgets. As far as the second amendment is concerned, it is calling for an additional EUR 1 million for orphan medicinal products, which the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products requires. I should like to know if it would be possible for us to vote on Amendment 231, so that the Agency might be able to work this year with all of the resources it requires.

You will realise that, technically speaking, this is not correct procedure. I entirely agree. However, it turns out that, since the vote in the Committee on Budgets, we have received additional details. If it were possible to vote in favour of Amendment 231, which would add EUR 1 million still available in the budget margin, this would enable us substantially to improve working conditions in such a very important area to us.

(Applause)

  President. If we have understood properly, you want us to vote first on Amendment 231 and then on Amendment 779.

  Catherine Guy-Quint (PSE). – (FR) Mr President, we can also vote in favour of Amendment 779. However, I should like it if, in addition to Amendment 779, we were able to vote in favour of granting a further EUR 1 million to the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products for orphan medicinal products. I should like to point out to you that, if anyone objects to this, we are obliged to accept his or her objection.

  President. Is there any opposition from the political groups?

  Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE). – (ES) Mr President, we prefer to conform to procedural principles. The original distribution of the voting list is therefore preferable.

  President. Then we shall proceed as planned.

- Before the vote on Amendment 446:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), rapporteur. – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, if this amendment is adopted, I also ask that the standard phrase that we have used for all similar amendments be adopted, which is ‘part of the appropriation is intended for’, because we cannot reserve specific funds.

- Before the vote on Amendments 74 and 223:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), rapporteur. – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, to avoid confusion during the vote, I propose we vote on Amendment 74 for the remarks and Amendment 223 for the amounts.

  President. Is there any opposition?

  Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE). – (ES) Mr President, we are returning to the same thing; we prefer the voting order established in the procedure. We do not understand these last-minute changes.

(Applause)

  Kathalijne Maria Buitenweg (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, in the amendments before us there is no change in the amounts. We are not voting on the amounts. There is only a remark on it. That is the only change. We will vote only on the remark. We will vote on the figures later.

  President. You are absolutely right. We shall proceed as planned.

- Before the vote on Amendment 292:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), rapporteur. – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, what I said before also applies to this amendment: if it is approved, the standard phrase should be adopted, because we cannot specifically reserve funds: hence ‘part of the appropriation is intended for’.

  President. Having taken note of this, we shall proceed to the vote on Amendment 292.

- Before the vote on Amendments 473 and 475:

  Valdis Dombrovskis (PPE-DE). – (LV) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, with regard to the ‘other institutions’ section of the 2006 budget, the following technical correction is necessary. The date mentioned in Amendments 473 and 475 — 31 October 2005 — should be removed from the notes and added to the explanatory statements.

(Parliament approved the technical amendments proposed by Mr Dombrovskis)